27% of top 300 Xbox games are back-compatible

by Christopher Grant { Jun 15th 2006 at 5:25PM }

Cheap Ass Gamer (and Joystiq's good buddy) CheapyD put on his thinking cap to figure out just what percentage of the top-rated Xbox games work on the 360. With notable classics like Psychonauts still unplayable (did you send out your e-mail?), how far along is the MS team in their ongoing struggle to getting "darn close to that stated goal of every title" backwards compatible?

CheapyD culled the titles from aggregate review-site Metacritic, cross-checked them against Microsoft's list, then threw it all into a chart for those of us who ~~can't read~~ are visual learners. The key points:

80% of the top-10 reviewed titles are backwards compatible. The two missing all-stars: Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 and Burnout 3.
Only 27% of the top-300 reviewed titles are backward compatible.

Even 300 titles is a far cry from the 800 or so titles currently available for the original Xbox. Wait, Far Cry? Nope, not available.

Tags: Back-compat, Backwards compatibility, BackwardsCompatibility

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Anonymous rep @ Jun 15th 2006 5:37PM

You know how to make 100% of your Xbox games compatible?

Play them ON your Xbox.

Seriously, though, it's only been 7 months since console release, and 10 months that I know for sure that there HAVE been people really working on BC issues. I think they've done a pretty good job, all things considered. You've got console architecture that completely changed, a video card that completely changed - heck, I've certainly got PC games that I wish were backwards compatible. (Anyone remember those wonderful DOS games we had? Even running them in DOSBox doesn't work - they were designed for computers that ran at 50 MHz, not 3.2 GHz - it's almost funny doing one train game I had, it takes the trains about 1/2 a second to do a run that should take them 5 minutes.)

LunarDuality @ Jun 15th 2006 5:50PM

Why not compare the games *sales* data with the B.C. list, since that was the stated metric for Microsoft?

That aside, you can see that MS is basically coming through with the idea that the better the game was, the *more likely* it will be prioritized to become B.C.

Obviously there will always be games some of us *wished* were B.C. but MS will probably never get all 800 done. It's just not that plausible.

But, I agree, MS has done a stellar job considering the massive challenge they had to make this work. All in all, an interesting bullet point for the console but honestly, I've barely used it. Too many new games to try.

Nate @ Jun 15th 2006 5:56PM

I think everyone should just do what I'm going to do and buy an Xbox as well. I have a 360....I had an Xbox, but it was broken beyond repair, so I tossed it thinking that I wouldn't need it anyway....turns out I do, so I can play games like Chronicles Of Riddick and PDO again. I mean, the BC list isn't half bad, but there are a lot more games I wanna play for the Xbox still, so it seems like the logical solution. Besides, even though the graphics for BC games may seem sharper on the 360, the games run a million times better on the regular Xbox.

djphatjive @ Jun 15th 2006 6:22PM

Basically backwards compatibility is for broke ass gamers that cant afford to buy a 360 without trading in there old xbox and 20 of there old games to buy a New Xbox 360.

GET A JOB!!!!!!

epobirs @ Jun 15th 2006 6:26PM

Heh. It appears I've commented on a Joystiq article before it was even posted. I'm tricky that way.

RazorElite @ Jun 15th 2006 6:29PM

I'm pretty sure the reason we aren't saying more BC games is probably how difficult it is. I know you're probably thinking 'duh', but as the developer of Psychonauts recently stated, they could help. So why isn't MS doesn't gather up the developers who want their titles played on 360 and let them do most the work, since they made the damn games. But I could be wrong. Yeah, MS is doing an OK jobs so far but they're only like quarter way through after probably a year (they've been working on it before 360 was released). So what, they gonna take another 3 years to finish? There are games people want to play NOW. They really need to find a way to make this work faster. At least they didn't do like dumb Sony though, put in the old chip, adding more cost and more possiblities of broken units. Software emulation I still think is the way to go, but they need to work faster!

epobirs @ Jun 15th 2006 6:44PM

#5

The problem is the original developer can't help. What would they actually do that would make things any easier? Microsoft has full access to the game binaries and can trace everything it does automatically with existing tools. The point at which the games crash is well know for any that have been through testing. Is anyone at Double Fine likely to have any special knowledge of emulation greater than those people specifically chosen for the job. (Some of whom likely came from Connectix, a company with long experience in emulation before being acquired by Microsoft.)

The only company in the world who could likely make any real difference in this effort is Nvidia. It is their two chips from the Xbox that are the primary targets of this project. (The Intel P-III is very well documented and covered by a highly refined emulator for PPC inherited from VirtualPC as part of the Conenctix buyout.) Reproducing the exact behavior of those chips in software is where most of the work lies. The closer they come to that goal the more Xbox software will work. There isn't much help Double Fine or any other developer could offer on that front, unless they used to be Nvidia chip engineers.

CorpCommander @ Jun 15th 2006 6:48PM

Some games that were popular probably won't see BC like Battlefield 2:MC since there is a 360 version out there. I think this is to get people to buy the 360 version. I still have my XBC so I'll play it there. I don't plan on getting the XB360 version though since the game is a bit too cartoony for me and doesn't really promote team play which I prefer.

The number that still shocks me though is that the PS2 is STILL outselling the XB360. Its the cheap price point. I think that should serve as a warning for Sony about their mega-priced PS3. Food for thought.

epobirs @ Jun 15th 2006 6:50PM

Uh-oh. Appears between Joystiq and Kotaku we've /.ed the CAG server.

bv @ Jun 15th 2006 7:02PM

Epobirs-
What could Double Fine possibly offer the BC crew at Microsft? Well how about this fact that Tim Schaefer stated in his most recent news post : "You know, if it would help, we'd be willing to fly all our engineers up to Seattle, and they'd do all the programming! Or, they could just tell you exactly how our engine works, and we could probably get it running on the 360 in just a few hours!" Few hours, is what Schaefer claims, and I'm willing to bet my 360 that he knows what he's talking about. Im not trying to pick a bone with you here, but I think Double Fine has a point when they are complaining about Microsoft and their Backwards Compatibility sluggishness.

source: http://www.doublefine.com/news.htm#13JUNE2006

Mike S @ Jun 15th 2006 7:07PM

Nintendo's next system after the Wii will feature backwards compatibility, not only for its own games, but for other systems' games as well.

DeezNuts420 @ Jun 15th 2006 7:13PM

!!!!!!!!COUNTERSTRIKE!!!!!!!!!!

epobirs @ Jun 15th 2006 8:08PM

#9

Again, how will this help?

Shafer is making vague assertions, none of which suggest the slightest benefit.

How can I explain this any more simply? Microsoft already has the game for analysis. (The source code typically is required as part of the approval process but the binary is what really matters and what must be supported.) They know where it breaks. No further amount of information about the game is going to speed up the coding of those portions of the emulator that need to more exactly reproduce the Xbox chipset to make this and numerous other games work.

Look at the problem from Microsoft's perspective. LEts say that using the latest rev of the emulator they analyze the remaining six hundred or so games that are still unsupported to find where they crash. After this run of testing the team has identified 10 common types of code that fails under the emulator. Some games will only have form of problem while others could manifest the whole list.

The team can only address one failure mode at a time. THey will either next take on the one that appears easiest to fix or the one that covers the most games without another failure mode being involved. It's a slow methodical process with no shortcuts. If Psychonauts has multiple failure modes it would be insane to make a special effort to get it running when so many other games could be covered along the way with little difference in the time required. And why should a special effort be made when games that are vastly more popular are still waiting?

Shaefer can talk all he wants but short of producing a native Xbox 360 version of the game and offering a special discount to Xbox 360 owners, what can he actually contribute at this point? Perhaps he could get in his time machine and deliver the game as originally scheduled back in the days when Microsoft was footing the bill. Shaefer failed to deliver on this project both as a second party and a third party developer. Not an endearing history for someone now making demands for special attention.

bv @ Jun 15th 2006 8:46PM

I'm just saying that Tim said he could fix it in 4 hours by showing them how the Psychonauts game engine works. I'm sure If Peter Moore knew about Tim's desire to help get this game moving, he would surely approve of him working hands on with the BC team at Microsoft. I think Tim's complaints just got lost among some no name people at Microsoft thinking he was either a hoax or was somebody else. I'm sure we will see the game on the BC list very soon as a result of Schaefer's recent blogging on this incident. Blogging travels fast, you'll see.

epobirs @ Jun 15th 2006 9:07PM

#14

I don't think you understand. The Microsoft team KNOWS how the Psychonauts game engine works. They can run it in a debugger and produce a list of every place it touches the hardware in a way not covered by the DirectX API. They know exactly where it performs acts the emulator cannot handle and what that code is. Making that determination is the easy part.

The problem is getting the emulator side working to the level of duplication needed. People who don't have a background in that specific task aren't going to be of much help.

Tim Shaefer is not as serious about this as you may think. It would take only a brief conversation with his coding staff for them to make it clear there wasn't much they could really do to help. Does Shaefer think there are hidden parts of the XGPU his guys know about and Microsoft's own engineers, with direct access to Nvidia IP under the license agreement, don't know about?

bv @ Jun 15th 2006 9:35PM

Well I think anytime you have the guy who developed the engine work hands on with your team, your going to have a win win situation. It's like having Kasporov help the creators of Deep Blue to create the Ultimate Chess Machine. And being as friendly as Microsoft is to developers and gamers in general, I can't see why they wouldn't at least allow Schaefer and his team to visit the BC crew and shoot the shit with them on this issue. I mean its not like Schaeffer is some nobody fanboy who has all the time in the world to fuck around. He's a busy guy who runs a development studio and he's a very successful business man. I just can't see why the team would ignore at least a visit by his team, there's no reason why it would hurt. Look at what this has brought upon Microsoft, negative press showing that the BC team is a bit disorganized. Certainly, if the right people were involved when Schaefer contacted them, none of this would have happened.

Eric @ Jun 15th 2006 9:42PM

CORRECTION:

The THREE missing all-stars: Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3, Burnout 3 and COUNTER-STRIKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WHY IS EVERYONE IGNORING THIS!?!?

COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!! COUNTER-STRIKE!!!!

Art Guy @ Jun 15th 2006 10:42PM

Out of all the Xbox titles that have sold over a million units, only 2 aren't either backward compatible or have a native equvilent on the 360 (like PGR3, Madden and NFS).

Two...

MicroSoft said they were focusing on the best sellers, and it looks like that is exactly what they are doing.

Which is more beneficial for the gamers:

Getting Psychonauts working for the 50k people who bought it.
or
A game like Spider-Man that sold a million and a half units?

__________________________________________________

"Wait, Far Cry? Nope, not available."

Why should MS spend time getting the Xbox original working when there is a better version already available on the 360? We are much better off if they are emulating games that currently don't have a 360 equivalent, like Mech Assault.

epobirs @ Jun 16th 2006 1:16AM

#16

Actually, Kasparov wouldn't be much help there. The way humans play chess and the way Deep Blue works are extremely different. Hanging with Kasparov would be for fun, not to advance the project.

Please, this is something Shaefer has single handedly made into a one-day controversy with the willing aid of a few web sites. Shaefer is a busy guy? He's spent the last five years on one, count 'em, one game project and ports of that project. If he and his employees reall have anything to contribute to running Psychonauts under emulation, it can surely be handled via email.

Go to www.doublefine.com and click on the 'Products' link. It takes you to a page displaying the long list of, no, it just shows Psychonauts. Plus on the shopping link you can buy a bunch of Psychonauts merchandise like t-shirts and yo-yos. That has surely had Tim burning the midnight for the last few years. It isn't even as if the PS2 port kept them busy. That was handed off to another company, Budcat, under contract. (Perhaps Budcat could be hired to make an Xbox 360 port but this game was a financial disaster for Majesco, so who is going to sponsor that?) There is some vague mention that Double Fine has started work on a PS3 game. Perhaps they should devote more time to meeting the schedule on that than bugging the emulation team and causing them to lose a day's work for a meaningless gesture. I'm sure Sony would rather they concentrated on the new project.

Six months from now I wouldn't be surprised if Psychonauts, along with many other games, was running on the 360. I would be very surprised if anything could be done to make it happen any faster than it is already likely to occur.

I don't have anything against Tim Shaefer and enjoyed some of his games. I do think some people have failed to notice that this is a guy who spent most of his career thus far at LucasArts and making a Raiders ending joke is like breathing for him. He probably gets an email every day from some fan demanding to know why Psychonauts won't run on the 360, to which Shaefer can only wonder, "Why didn't it sell?" and try to make a joke in response to the tiny but intense demand.

bobeotm @ Jun 16th 2006 7:58AM

With the next generation being a smaller jump than it was from the generation before it, backwards compatability should be thought of as a big deal. Part of the reason backwards compatability wasnt a big deal for the ps2, is because ps2 games looked way better than the best psone games, and no one wanted to go back and play ugly games. However, this time around the next gen stuff from the 360 looks good, but its not necessarily making my xbox games look bad either. I would be more prone to do it this year than I would have at this point last generation.

Their biggest mistake in my opinion is making alot of crappy obscure xbox games available before many of the bigger more popular titles. No Psychonauts? No Farcry? No Soul Calibur? Yet every list they release is dominated by crap no one owns.

I have a nephew who owns a 360 and he has only two 360 games, nothing other than table tennis as interested him since launch, so playing his favorite xbox games to fill the gaming drought is essential. Yet most of them dont work, and they were all popular games. Why bother making games backwards compatable that got horrible reviews and no one bought?

Pedro @ Jun 16th 2006 9:08AM

You MS bitches would sell your soul to defend microsuck.

Paul @ Jun 16th 2006 9:54AM

Have some respect people! Just think for a minute what's actually going on here. Software emulation of an entirely different architecture. To the average gamer that might not mean much. But as a developer myself I can tell you this is no trivial task. People need to quit bitching and give MS some respect for the incredible job they've done with the titles available so far. Trust me, if it could have been done any better/faster it would have.

WTF @ Jun 16th 2006 11:41AM

!!!COUNTER-STRIKE!!!

current #3 on Live!, Super Ultimate Platinum Hit, not BC...

WTF

somedude @ Jun 16th 2006 2:18PM

#22,
I think a lot of the backlash is not because of unreasonable backward-compatibility expectations on our part. It's because Microsoft promised a lot and has severely under-delivered.

Moore stated that "we're going to get darn close to that stated goal of every title done,"

In what alternate universe is 27% considered "close"?

The game I'd love to see BC is D&D:Heroes. My friends and I had an absolute blast playing that game together and I'd love to through play it again.